(programming - not 'art')

Re: (programming) . the rendition of a New Program, fraught with beauty,
plot (or utility), story-line (or step saving automation), sprinkled with
visionary imagination and characterization, all combined in a unique and
individualized manner,

A programming design/solution can be ELEGANT, SIMPLISTIC, EFFICIENT, and
EASILY UNDERSTOOD, but it should NEVER be "fraught with beauty . sprinkled
with visionary imagination and characterization, . combined in a unique and
individualized manner,". This programmer has not learned the maxim of
"ego-less code" - programming is an ENGINEERING DISCIPLINE, NOT an ART.
GOOD programs are written with an eye to strict adherence to a complete set
of employer/client/industry "PROGRAMMING STANDARDS and GUIDELINES", such as
HIGH COHESION, LOOSE DATA COUPLING, LOCALITY OF REFERENCE, SELF-DEFINING
DATA/PROCESS NAMES, FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION, EGO-LESS CODE, BALANCED STRUCTURE
and the "K-I-S-S" principle - "Keep It Simple, Stupid". Remember that you
are being paid to write THE CLIENT'S program, not YOUR program, and that, in
all probability, someone else will need to read, understand, and maintain
the program code in the future. A GOOD Systems Analyst/Programmer can take
a complex process and make it appear simple in program code. Too many times
have we seen just the opposite take place, usually by programmers trying to
be "cute", "unique" or "individualized".

"Ye Olde Goate", coding for over 38 years, structured for 34, Development
Lead for 30, advocate/proponent of the "organized, modular, reusable code
paradigm" that started with "modular programming" in the '60s, "structured
programming" in the '70s, "client/server" in the '80s, "Object-Oriented" in
the '90s, and now "SOA".